Tony1

I'm sure its a very good camera Rob, Amazon products tend to be very well designed, based on the ones I've tried. The Fire tablets, for example, are superb value for money and perform really well compared to a couple of others I tried in their price range. My personal reservations were based on the most recent reviews of the blink on Amazon, and there enough bad reviews (and some comments in youtube reviews) that I decided to go elsewhere. The odds are that I'd have been fine with a couple of blink cameras- statistically my chances of getting a dud were very small. But I've learned from bitter experience to pay attention to bad reviews, especially when there is a trend in them, and they are recent. You pays your money, and you takes your chance, I guess. Ps- just a note on the siting of them. I found a pair of camera mounts that will hold them about 18 inches above the roof (clamped to the solar panels), so I'm going to give those a try. My cunning plan is to have the rear mounted camera facing forwards, and the forward mounted camera facing backwards. That way the two will 'cover' each other, and there wont be any blind spots. But it all depends what kind of threat it is you are worried about. The risks faced by a boater in London, for example, might be different from those faced by a boater moored up for two weeks in a remote rural location. Full time liveaboards might also have a different view of the level of security they prefer, given that they may be carrying a few items of high value on board.

In my case there are two sets of panels. The first set is mounted on the front half of the roof, starting about 2ft from the centre line ring (that bit of space helps to avoid fouling the centre line on the panels), and ending just before the chimney at the front end of the roof. The front set comprises four smallish panels totalling 660 watts, and they were there when I bought the boat. Those were great for running the fridge for most of the days during summer, except when under very thick tree cover, or heavily overcast sky, or both- but I wanted to try for solar hot water so I added a pair of panels mounted on the rear half of the roof, and those are rated at 375 watts each. I left a 2ft space between those panels and the centre line ring, and that's worked out well. If I'd placed them much closer to the centre line, I think I'd be forever catching it under the panel edges. That also leaves a space on the roof that will hold about 4-6 bags of coal, which is very handy in winter when the cratch is getting full. Width is an issue though. I cant safely walk the sides of the roof alongside the front panels- they cover the space almost completely. But they are about 7 years old, and more modern panels seem to give higher yields for a smaller surface area. The rear panels are about 1 metre wide and I think 1.5m long. One metre wide gives just enough room to walk past them on the roof, but very very carefully- and especially when the boat is bobbing a bit in a lock. You also need to leave a couple of feet of space for you to climb onto the roof, so you cant have the panels installed right up the rear end of the roof. If I were starting over I'd sacrifice 20cm of width and go for the 80cm wide panels, which still give plenty of power, but which are much easier/safer to walk past. My boat is 50ft and tbh there's no space left on the roof, which is a pain as I'd have liked to fit a roof box for extra storage, but its all about compromises. In terms of performance, today was the first day in (I think) about 2 months when I didnt get enough solar to heat the water.

I've been considering a couple of cameras mounted externally so I can take a quick look at what's happening outside if I hear any unusual noises, or to alert me if someone steps onto the stern during the night. I found a detailed review (below) where the tester found that the blink camera didnt respond at all well to motion detection situations, and he implied he had heard about this not being a rare issue, so I've decided not to go for the blink, but this one instead, which apparently has a magnetic base and can be stuck anywhere on the steel hull. https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B08TLJRQVY/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 My thinking is that although its easy to nick, the scrotes will always assume its mounted with screws, and they wont even bother trying to remove it: I was tempted by the google nest cam which has very good reviews, but the more recent model is pretty large, and I'm worried I'll actually bump into it whilst going through the stern door (next to which my camera will be mounted). As the view radius thingy is only 110 degrees, I'm thinking of getting two cameras, and mounting one on each side of the rear bulkhead- so one next to the door, and another above the gas locker. That means whatever side of the boat is next to the towpath, I'll have a camera that has a good view of anyone stepping aboard. My other query was around positioning. Even if placed near to the roof and pointing out horizontally, the cameras will only record the legs of an intruder. To record the face, I think they need to be pointing upwards. I hope you'll come back and update us with your results using these cameras, I suspect its a issue that a number of boaters will be taking an interest in. I was worried about wifi reaching onto the stern since my router is at the front of the boat. I can certainly pick up the wifi signal with no problem when stood anywhere on the stern, so fingers crossed the same will be true for a security camera, which I think works with the router.

I'm all about locally sourced ingredients, and there seemed to be no shortage of rats when I was at Chester Basin- and I was lucky enough to find this delicious recipe for everyone's favourite rodent du jour: Why wait for the apocalypse?

On a related note, I remember having significantly more pedestrians greet me when I went up the more rural sections of the Nene, than I usually see on the canals. Parents with younger children always seemed to point out the boat and encourage them to wave, which I was more than happy to reciprocate. Canal pedestrians do often greet me, but not as many as I seem to remember on the Nene. That said, it was end of August 2020, just after a major lockdown, and people were genuinely glad to be out and about, so maybe that was it. I don't remember seeing many fishermen on the Nene, but I'm sure they would be just as black-hearted as their counterparts on the canals. In fact, when I pass anglers I always wonder whether they are thinking like Al Capone in this film:

I shall plan to cycle mine down to about 11.4v some time in the next week. I dont think they've been below 12.7v for many months. I think many lithium users are now au fait with the idea of cycling between say 20 and 80% SoC (or similar) as a routine practice, but I'm not sure how many have picked up on the idea of improving longevity by periodically doing almost a full cycle, say 5% to 100%. For a liveaboard there are some practical considerations to work around. One of the constraints I have involves the time of day that the batteries reach their lowest SoC. I dont want the SoC or the voltage to get so low during the night that it sets off the low voltage alarm on the BMV712 during at say 4 am (or even worse, to get so low that it triggers the emergency disconnect of all the loads). So I set my trigger values very conservatively. The normal cycle is that the MPPTs will charge the batteries up to say 75%, and then the BMV 712 will switch them off. The next thing that should happen in an ideal world is they should discharge down to say 25% before the MPPTs switch back on again and start charging. But if I were to get down to that 25% SoC level at say 7pm (by which time the solar charge is pretty much over for the day), it could be that by the next morning when the solar starts charging again, I'll be down to 10% SoC, which is lower than I really want to cycle them on a day to day basis. So what I tend to do is to set the MPPTs to switch on again at about 50%, because even if the SoC gets down to that trigger setting late in the day when there's no more solar, I know there will still be enough charge to get through the night. The other consideration is whether I'm going to need hot water early in the day. If I know that I need to wash myself, or perhaps some clothes, first thing in the morning, I'll adjust the BMV712 relay settings so that I allow more charge into the batteries during the afternoon before, and maybe let them get up to 85% SoC. What that means is I'll have enough charge in the batteries that I can switch on the immersion heater first thing, and have hottish water within 40 minutes. But if I've let the batteries get down to 20% overnight (in the interests of better cycling), and the morning solar isnt great, then I cant use the immersion heater when I need to. So there are these day to day considerations that affect how you manage the solar charging process, and how you set the limits so that you dont overstress the batteries.

I must admit, I've never considered cycling my lithiums periodically down to 2.8v (say 5% SoC). With all the solar I get in, I usually cycle them between 45 and 75%, with the odd run down to 20% and sometimes up to 100% to synchronise- so they'll be practically comatose by now (although to be fair, they do seem to carry on performing exactly the same, day and day out). But on a more technical note, looking at your diagram, I think its clear the electrical pixie density on the post is lower than it should be, but that is entirely predictable. You've not sacrificed a single gerbil since you got the cells. What's needed here is practical solutions, so my recommendation for this issue is to slaughter a brace of gerbils on the next full moon - and the more grisly the killing, the better they like it.

My impression is that people behave slightly differently when passing a moored boat than when passing a moving boat. The moving boats I pass almost all seem to follow the convention of giving some form of greeting, but the moored boats don't always give a greeting, and those passing a moored boat sometimes fail to give a greeting. As someone said above, I think its partly down to a slight unease around the issue of how fast the moving boat might be going. So the driver of the moving boat might be wondering whether they will be admonished in some way by the person on the moored boat, and the people on the moored boat are mentally noting the speed of the moving boat, and making a decision as to whether it is too fast- and if it is fast, whether it is worth saying anything. For example, I decided against saying anything to the half dozen boozed-up and shouty young men who passed my moored boat going flat out down the cut last summer, because they would have ignored my advice anyway, and I might easily have gotten into an altercation facing very bad odds. Sometimes I've been doing some job or other on the stern (or down in the engine bay) when a boat passed, and I've been distracted enough not to consider greetings to passing boats. But if I were sat out on the stern, I would generally expect a passing boat to give a greeting- and certainly if I gave them one to start with.

I spent a few grand on a recon engine for a Mondeo about 20 years ago. It failed after less than 1,000 miles. Obviously there are some satisfied customers out there, and this is strictly a personal view based on a single experience, but I wouldn't even consider a recon engine. If I really had to save money I'd go for a 57ft shell (which will be easier to handle as well), and install a less powerful but brand new engine, maybe 50-55bhp.

Those dreadful Scottish ruffians will be along any moment to tell you how wonderful the lowland canals are, but you mustn't believe a word of it. You'll be devoured by midges, and the haggis are biting at this time of year too. But joking aside, I must confess I was also considering moving my boat up there, but on the whole I was put off by a few issues. Firstly, you need to pay for a mooring all year round (even if you dont use it much), and also the canals aren't that long, so you might get bored of the limited cruising range. Then you've got the cost of maybe £3k to move the boat. But that said, if Scotland gets independence and we get the chance to become citizens, I might well change my mind and move the boat up there. I can speak Scottish reasonably well, my problem is understanding them when they reply. What I do is speak louder and slower, and begin each sentence with the word 'och'.

That's what a year of boating will do to you. But no, that was at the end of 2019 I think, they wanted a recent photo for the staff webpage. After that I got rid of the ridiculous long hair and the awful beard. Now I just need a bit of a tan I reckon, and I'll look like a Greek God.

Yes, and I must apologise if I gave the impression that a desire to escape from society always implies some form of mental issue. I personally love the fact that for a few days at a time, I can reduce my contact with society at large, and I hope there is nothing seriously 'unsettled' about myself. Lets be honest about it, we all need some degree of human contact or company, but society is liberally sprinkled with toxic and hurtful people, or people whose worldview and politics are so different to our own that we simply cannot stand to be in their company for very long. My first instinct is to avoid any contact or communication with these people (and that includes online interactions), but I hope that doesnt mean I am suffering from mental issues. I like to think it means I just dont like being around what I view as negative, cruel, trollish or sociopathic people.

Personally, I think it is very likely that the lifestyle draws in a number of people who are already 'unsettled' to some degree. Unfortunately I also think that it might not be the best move for people suffering from mental troubles, because it is too easy to become isolated. It may seem to those folks that this is what they want, but I suspect that it doesn't help with their issues. But that said, mental support services are harder to obtain anyway these days due to all the cutbacks, so there's no guarantee that if they moved into a house, the affected people would get the help they need to try to make them more mentally healthy. So in that context, why not become more isolated and more antisocial on the cut? At least they can spend time in a pleasant environment rather than a grey city. It's hard to be optimistic given the current circumstances of the NHS and the country.

As Woody Allen once quipped, don't knock it- it's sex with someone I love

I was of course jesting Mr D. The tragic truth is that ten months of retirement, drunkenness and debauchery has left me a broken shell, and a singularly unattractive proposition for most normal human beings of any gender. My hope is that there is an alien species somewhere that would find me a paragon of beauty (most likely those ones that have pudgy grey skin, thinning hair, and red, hollow eyes). But realistically, we will not meet this discerning alien species within my lifetime, nor are they likely to have a dating website- so I am resigned to living my remaining years as a bachelor. I could hope to move to the Everglades and form a romantic relationship with a manatee, but the hot weather would make me grumpy and disagreeable.

Sadly I dont recall her name, but she was certainly interesting and great fun to talk to. Hers would make a great story for a youtube video- from the veldt to the shroppie.

No worries, I thought it probably wasnt on purpose. The only worry is that now they know how handsome I am, legions of women are going to start stalking me 😀

I've addressed this point a couple of times above, but I'll repeat it once more: if you would ban all e-scooters because a small minority ride illegal models, why not ban all ebikes because a minority ride around on overpowered illegal models? Why not close the entire CWDF website if a few contributors happen to breach the guidelines for behaviour? Because sometimes the answer is not banning, but rather better enforcement of the regulations. Hundreds of thousands of people want the freedom and convenience offered by affordable personal electric transport, and they are finally going to get it. Just a courtesy note: I deliberately chose not to put a personal photograph on this site for privacy reasons, and your inserting the photo from my whatsapp account is pretty poor form.

Sorry mate, but I've been having this discussion with Peter all day, and I really can't be arsed to go over the ground again. In my view, the case is absolutely clear and complete unarguable. At this point you either agree, or you don't. You dont, Fair play to you. Enjoy your evening. The debating society is closed for today.

I absolutely agree. I personally think it is highly likely that in many cases, mental disorders are a direct result of an individual's treatment by parents and by society. There are many people who would have ended up much more happy and stable if society had been more forward thinking, and kinder to the poor and disadvantaged. And there are lots of those who could now be helped enormously to regain a more stable mental situation, if only the resources were available. But support services of this sort were slashed to the bone during the austerity measures after 2010, and the country is now so bankrupt that there is zero chance of those support service being reinstated within the next decade, even if a government got into to power who regarded the NHS as a priority. It seems as if the cupboard is bare, and we can look forward to nothing but more poverty and reduced NHS provision for the foreseeable future. Those who need non-critical mental health support are probably going to face a struggle.

This topic brings to mind a comment made to me by a very interesting lady boater in her mid 60s who I spoke to last summer, and who had moved to the UK from South Africa a couple of years ago, in order to live on a narrowboat. She said that most of the solo liveaboards she had met so far seemed to be 'damaged', which I understood to mean that they were suffering from some degree of unhappiness- and in the worse cases, a clear mental disorder. Coming from a person who had lived in a society that had itself gone through years of extreme and deadly violence, it initially struck me as an odd thing to say- but of course she was coming at it as a relative newcomer to UK society, which I think gave her a more objective viewpoint. My own response was to say personally, I didnt feel all that damaged- apart from the emotional bruising of a painful relationship breakup a few years ago- and I hadn't then met enough solo boaters to form an opinion. But in the year since then, I have met or observed a number of liveaboards who have clearly been suffering from mental disorders. One chap I met a few months ago refused to even admit the existence of covid-19, for example, and he held firmly to the belief that the royal family were alien lizards who had taken human form. My response (that any alien lizard clever enough to travel here would have chosen a better-looking human body) went unheeded, and nothing I said could persuade him from his beliefs- many of which had been gathered via youtube and far-right conspiracy theorist websites. The sad thing is that if I had pointed this new counselling service out to him, he would almost certainly have refused to use it, so certain was he about these impossibly unlikely beliefs.

And whilst we argue over a few hundred scooter crashes, the polar icecaps continue to melt, thousands of animal species face extinction, our temperatures continue to rise and break new records almost every year, and the planet moves ever closer to the point of no return. There is a much, much bigger picture to consider here. But yes, I think there can be little doubt that in the case of an accident, e-scooters are far more risky to their drivers than cars are. How could it be otherwise, when the rider has no protection? But hundreds of thousands of commuters and leisure users cant afford to buy and run a car, and yet they dont want to get to their destination covered in sweat as they might on a bike in warm weather. Those users- who might well increase into the millions over the next few years- are prepared to take the increased risk of injury compared to a car, because it is their only practical and affordable method of personal transportation. Many of them might not particularly like taking the risks involved, but will probably feel that they dont have have much choice (like the example of the nurse I mentioned above, who felt safer riding home on a scooter after a late shift than she did using the bus - the nurse who used a scooter with a maximum speed of 12 mph, and was fined £1000 and given 6 penalty points for trying to get home safely). Or perhaps the scooter riders will accept the risks because they'd rather travel in the open air than on an overcrowded bus or tube, because our public transport system is very poor quality. Who knows. But if commuters are willing to ride to work at 15mph on an e-scooter for economic reasons, or for personal freedom of transport, is it right to stop them doing that? Those 3 deaths and 900 injuries arose from an estimated 1 million scooter journeys taken every month in 2021- thats 12 million scooter journeys over the year. And that's only the legal journeys taken on hire scooters, it doesnt include the many hundreds of thousands of illegal scooter journeys. And only 3 deaths. So maybe it's not that bad? Or maybe we should just continue to prolong this interesting discussion about how many injured scooter riders can stand on the head of a pin, and let the planet continue to die for another 5 years before we make any changes?